kj2022

I got Max Payne 3 on sale just now. I just completed 6 chapters but apparently you need a bunch of other DLC to finish it. And frankly, I would rather watch someone do their taxes for four hours rather than spend one more minute with Max "Nickelback" Payne. He never shuts up. He's like if jar jar binks was a manic depressive.

The shooting was fun, though. Frankly, if I had something that was just that, it wouldn't be so bad. If I didn't have to spend my time with Sir Osis of Liver, I probably would have downloaded the content necessary to finish the game.

you never played the old Max paynes? He's the same exact way, and wth you
Mean require dlc to finish the game? I don't even..

LA Noire is presented the same way digitally on 360, so I can vouch for him on that. And yes, the shooting in Max Payne was just a pure joy.

kj2022

The driving in Midnight Club: LA is better than the driving in GTA V. That's because Midnight Club: LA is a racing game. You race. In GTA V....you get where I'm going with this, thanks.

Dude, the driving in Midnight Club LA sucks ass compared to V. The point is that the gun mechanics feel more natural in Max Payne, and more fun, and that should have been easily been translated to GTA V.

cp1dell

Nothing more than reiteration here, but of course Max Payne 3 has better gunplay than GTA V. It's a shooter. The entirety of the gameplay is shooting. You shoot. In GTA V, you do more, no?

The driving in Midnight Club: LA is better than the driving in GTA V. That's because Midnight Club: LA is a racing game. You race. In GTA V....you get where I'm going with this, thanks.

So f*cking what if there is more to do in GTA V? A large majority of missions, side activities, and side-missions involve shooting. The gunplay in GTA is a very large aspect, a very large aspect. Regardless if there are other features in the game you seriously can't say the shooting doesn't need to be as good as it was in MP3. It takes up a lot of the gameplay. Almost every mission has you shooting some goons.

Having other features in a game is no good reason to cut corners on another one.

Algonquin Assassin, Cutter De Blanc, coach_wargo and 1 other like this

Nothing more than reiteration here, but of course Max Payne 3 has better gunplay than GTA V. It's a shooter. The entirety of the gameplay is shooting. You shoot. In GTA V, you do more, no?

The driving in Midnight Club: LA is better than the driving in GTA V. That's because Midnight Club: LA is a racing game. You race. In GTA V....you get where I'm going with this, thanks.

So f*cking what if there is more to do in GTA V? A large majority of missions, side activities, and side-missions involve shooting. The gunplay in GTA is a very large aspect, a very large aspect. Regardless if there are other features in the game you seriously can't say the shooting doesn't need to be as good as it was in MP3. It takes up a lot of the gameplay. Almost every mission has you shooting some goons.

Having other features in a game is no good reason to cut corners on another one.

It's kind of funny when you think about it. Michael's ability is basically ripoff of bullet time. Sure the shooting is better than GTA IV (As it should be ), but it's disappointing it doesn't feel as intense and hard hitting as MP3 when it should have.

Eutyphro

It's kind of funny when you think about it. Michael's ability is basically ripoff of bullet time. Sure the shooting is better than GTA IV (As it should be ), but it's disappointing it doesn't feel as intense and hard hitting as MP3 when it should have.

cp1dell

I actually thought the gunplay and gore effects was done much better in GTA IV. I'll say why ;

* IV had much better gunshot sound effects than in GTA V. You could the pop and clatter of gunshot sounds crisp and clear in IV, compared to V's loud cap gun-sounding effects.

* IV had much better selection of guns and they looked better too, especially with the pistols. IV had Glocks, which V does not have, for me personally that's a big thing.

* The gunplay in IV just felt better.

I can agree with everything but the last point, unless I'm misunderstanding you. The controls and fake "run-and-gun" feel very similar to VC and SA. They're much better than IV, but not as good as MP3. Other than that, yeah, the guns in IV felt unique from each other. The guns in V just feel like basic reskins with small edits made to the stats - which is awful when you consider the weapons included in the GTA Online patches are exactly this.

Official General

I actually thought the gunplay and gore effects was done much better in GTA IV. I'll say why ;

* IV had much better gunshot sound effects than in GTA V. You could the pop and clatter of gunshot sounds crisp and clear in IV, compared to V's loud cap gun-sounding effects.

* IV had much better selection of guns and they looked better too, especially with the pistols. IV had Glocks, which V does not have, for me personally that's a big thing.

* The gunplay in IV just felt better.

I can agree with everything but the last point, unless I'm misunderstanding you. The controls and fake "run-and-gun" feel very similar to VC and SA. They're much better than IV, but not as good as MP3. Other than that, yeah, the guns in IV felt unique from each other. The guns in V just feel like basic reskins with small edits made to the stats - which is awful when you consider the weapons included in the GTA Online patches are exactly this.

I can't explain the last part properly. I don't know why, it just felt better in IV, maybe it was the better gunshot sounds and the fact that I was using Glocks and Uzi/SMGs. Who knows, just how I felt.

The SMG in IV had a frightening sound, it sounded like rapid fire, bangin' thunder. Anytime an enemy gang member fired one at me, it sent me fleeing hard.

cp1dell

I actually thought the gunplay and gore effects was done much better in GTA IV. I'll say why ;

* IV had much better gunshot sound effects than in GTA V. You could the pop and clatter of gunshot sounds crisp and clear in IV, compared to V's loud cap gun-sounding effects.

* IV had much better selection of guns and they looked better too, especially with the pistols. IV had Glocks, which V does not have, for me personally that's a big thing.

* The gunplay in IV just felt better.

I can agree with everything but the last point, unless I'm misunderstanding you. The controls and fake "run-and-gun" feel very similar to VC and SA. They're much better than IV, but not as good as MP3. Other than that, yeah, the guns in IV felt unique from each other. The guns in V just feel like basic reskins with small edits made to the stats - which is awful when you consider the weapons included in the GTA Online patches are exactly this.

I can't explain the last part properly. I don't know why, it just felt better in IV, maybe it was the better gunshot sounds and the fact that I was using Glocks and Uzi/SMGs. Who knows, just how I felt.

The SMG in IV had a frightening sound, it sounded like rapid fire, bangin' thunder. Anytime an enemy gang member fired one at me, it sent me fleeing hard.

When you say the gunplay are you talking about the actual controls, or the gameplay concerning guns? Because I definitely agree with the latter. The effects, physics, peds reactions etc. in IV were a lot better. Whereas in V you just shoot people a few times and they're dead. It almost doesn't matter what gun you use, because everything is so fragile on foot that they all become the same thing.

cp1dell

A bit like real life, it doesn't matter what gun you use, as long as you hit the fella you're aiming at.

Still, it's not that great in a game. IV, RDR, and especially MP3 still had this realistic feel to it - but it was still nice shooting enemies. They had more health, but covering that up was the fact that the NPCs reacted to the gunshots. Like in IV they would limp or just writhe in pain on the ground. RDR you could shoot someone in the knee and they would drag their foot. Both knees they would kneel and wait for an execution. Blast someone in the stomach and they would crawl on the ground begging for mercy. MP3 where there were tons of animations and Euphoria "grabs" at wounds.

But GTA V? Two or three shots and they're dead. One or two shots and they're still alive? Nothing, they just keep on running or fighting. Knocked out or incapacitated? Doesn't exist in GTA V. They're always dead. Melee weapons aren't even fun to use since they're all one-hit-kill.

The combat and gunplay just isn't as fun as it was in IV, RDR, and MP3. It's there, but not as enjoyable.

Richard Power Colt

I actually thought the gunplay and gore effects was done much better in GTA IV. I'll say why ;

* IV had much better gunshot sound effects than in GTA V. You could the pop and clatter of gunshot sounds crisp and clear in IV, compared to V's loud cap gun-sounding effects.

* IV had much better selection of guns and they looked better too, especially with the pistols. IV had Glocks, which V does not have, for me personally that's a big thing.

* The gunplay in IV just felt better.

I can agree with everything but the last point, unless I'm misunderstanding you. The controls and fake "run-and-gun" feel very similar to VC and SA. They're much better than IV, but not as good as MP3. Other than that, yeah, the guns in IV felt unique from each other. The guns in V just feel like basic reskins with small edits made to the stats - which is awful when you consider the weapons included in the GTA Online patches are exactly this.

I can't explain the last part properly. I don't know why, it just felt better in IV, maybe it was the better gunshot sounds and the fact that I was using Glocks and Uzi/SMGs. Who knows, just how I felt.

The SMG in IV had a frightening sound, it sounded like rapid fire, bangin' thunder. Anytime an enemy gang member fired one at me, it sent me fleeing hard.

The sound effects in IV were more memorable, but they sounded super unrealistic and quite frankly a little silly sometimes imo. Also I think the gunplay felt more clumsy in IV. But we have our opinions.

A fan boy recap:

It's ok for V to have inferior shooting mechanics because it's not a shooter.

It's ok for V to have inferior driving physics because it's not a racing game.

It's ok for V to have an inferior story because it's not a story driven game.

It's unfair of us to have high expectations from R* for anything other than the graphics and the size of the map.

Shiny > actual game play

I still think both shooting mechanics and driving are better in V than IV. The plot was a bit weak in V sure though I liked the characters. Imo V>IV mainly just, because of some of the mechanical improvements and, because V just has a lot more stuff than IV.